Planetary challenges align with planetary solutions. The magnitude of the changes brought about by artificial intelligence in our lives cannot be dealt with by the logic of war, nor by the unilateral perspective of the technocratic model. It assumes a human decision that creates a bridge of dialogue between knowledge, interests, worldviews and sensibilities.
For this purpose, we have summoned 50 experts from all over the world from the Vatican Academy of Social Sciences to exchange experiences and perspectives that will allow us to build artificial intelligence for peace, social justice and integral human development.
Can a common symphony arise from experiences and knowledge as diverse as philosophy, economics, theology, physics, mathematics, law, sociology, politics, medicine, engineering and education?
Is it possible to compile a chain of values despite the geographical origin of developers and experts, starting from China in the era of Confucius to Silicon Valley for tech millionaires, passing through deep Latin America, suffering Africa, advanced Europe, and the Vatican’s social church doctrine?
The answer indicates a possible dream, which is yes. Naturally, it entails unaddressable preconditions whether from extractive colonialism, from the arms race, or from denialism that ignores the fact that artificial intelligence is not only here to stay, but to grow at an astonishing pace. It takes creativity to think “outside the arcane box of algorithms,” and open minds and hearts with bold, actionable hope.
All of this means avoiding zombie regulation, which regulates the bare minimum and does not address the basics; and overcoming digital stagflation, which consists of information inflation and value deflation.
The two-day dialogue at the Vatican Academy had tremendous depth. Considering that we are living the countdown, because it is no longer about analyzing the consequences of generative chats, but rather about taking a peek at the development of agentic AI that is in a mad race towards supposed artificial general intelligence.
The presentations gave us the opportunity to verify that the worst thing we can do from public policy is to leave AI on autopilot with the risk of a social and even existential rift.
It requires concerted action that sets not only “red lights” or “guardrails” to avoid AI going off course, but also “green lights” to transform AI into a tool to accelerate social and societal inclusion processes. That is why we call the meeting “Rerum Novarum Digital”, an update to the 1891 letter of Leo XIII and a response to what Pope Leo
Artificial intelligence for peace. Because we need a binding digital constitutionalism, which condenses the rules of the game between all countries and coordinates the multiple ethical initiatives that have emerged in recent years. Just as the world has concluded for itself – despite progress and setbacks – a global non-proliferation agreement, we must give ourselves similar geostrategic frameworks to prevent the spread of artificial intelligence for purposes of war, whether commercial or military.
The origin of AI design cannot be a conspiracy of occult wizards or financial bubble demigods, unleashing a race toward mass suicide. Much less so, when artificial intelligence is combined with biological manipulation, or bioweapons.
The courage of disarmament called for by Pope Leo XIV begins with disarming artificial intelligence and dismantling structural hate speech.
This is stated in the latest statements of the Future of Life Institute and the Future Society, which I have just joined, with the most qualified scientists on the planet.
Artificial Intelligence for Technological Social Justice. Through advance distribution agreements between employers and workers, governments and scientists, through technological collective agreements, which take into account the new time and space that artificial intelligence introduces into employment relations.
This predetermines the social value that AI adds in companies and professions and agrees on the financial and institutional mechanisms able to share its benefits, which include in particular the areas of medicine, education, transparency of state authorities, platform multiple realities and the care economy.
We also need new measures of honest renegotiation of the social contract, which capture the phenomenon at its true scale and avoid what Robert Solow once depicted: “We can see the computer age everywhere, except in productivity statistics.”
Artificial intelligence for integrated human developmentto. This builds a virtuous triangle between this dramatically changing technology, climate action, and sustainable finance. Artificial intelligence to mobilize resources that do not rely on speculation and algorithmic predation, but rather to finance the end of human and environmental poverty on our planet.
This requires, as a top priority, an increase in the research budget on multidimensional security for large language models, which today barely amounts to 3% of global investment in this sector.
AI is not for casino capitalism, but for a great global cause, as evidenced by the many “nature technology” initiatives that seek to appreciate the enormous biodiversity of our region.
As I analyzed in detail in the book I just published, The Artificial Intelligence Atlas of Human Development in Latin America, there are thousands upon thousands of young people and academics who are already using AI to spread medical treatments, improve water and energy use, improve cocoa, banana, wheat, and rice yields in Ecuador, Argentina, Colombia, and Costa Rica, promote constructive civic engagement, create safer jobs, personalize education, and democratize finance.
AI for dignity is possible, with “ethics by design,” rather than “addiction by design”; A promoter of the well-being of society rather than a predator of our soil or our minds. We need environmental conversion to take care of our common home. We also need a digital transformation of shared home care.
This challenge has become more important than ever for Latin America. Building data centers and receiving multi-million dollar investments in mining and biomaterials should be the starting point for designing innovative and innovative new industrial development policies that meet social agreements, enable the strengthening of national scientific capacities, put work and human dignity at the centre, and enhance transparency and intergenerational sustainability.
Huge, rapid and positive leaps for productivity and social integration of the most vulnerable sectors can be achieved using new technologies, if we start from the basic principle that humans are irreplaceable and that artificial intelligence is neither an obligation nor an algorithmic inevitability, but a means to promote better societies.
This obvious fact is today the main obstacle to overcome. AI that appears innovative but perpetuates unjust social structures becomes a maze of mirrors of the status quo.
Artificial intelligence, aligned from its inception to the standards of the global public good, can become an agent of virtuous human development. In the face of none of these options, it’s worth crossing our arms.
The compass of meaning for navigating this atlas of “uncharted territories” is the understanding that if we do not act in time with new sensitivity and imagination, we risk that AI will end up turning humans into obsolete, disposable artifacts.
